• leweb
    +4

    I don't differentiate between different collections of absurd beliefs, so in that sense, if you use "cult" to mean the body of adherents of a religion, all of the things you listed are cults. If you use it to mean an aberrant set of beliefs, you need to define a cutoff for what should be considered "normal", and this is a matter of opinion. If you want mine, any of the Abrahamic religions and their spinoffs qualify as bizarre and immoral, regardless of how many followers they have. Others that are more philosophy/culture based like Shinto and Buddhism have strange elements to them but I wouldn't call them "cults" by the second definition (with the caveat that my knowledge of them is limited).

    • AdelleChattre
      +3

      As an atheistic, realist moral philosophy, I’d set Buddhism apart from the rest. Not that it, or any religion, is free from ritualized sexual abuse. Still, Mormonism is often singled out as somehow being a cult as if the only weirdness in religion generally was to be found in Mormons’ particular version of Zion. It's all madness as far as I can tell.

      • leweb
        +5

        Agreed. Buddhism has a few weird things, like Karma, but it's much more reasonable than most others (although that's not too hard).

        • AdelleChattre
          +4

          I like the part about not having to pretend to believe any fairy tales are literally true, I'll admit.